eivarv

How does one formulate what constitutes a correct response to discovering a fallacy in an argument?

I know the conclusion isn't necessarily false, but I also have no reason for assuming it to be true - since there is no good argument to support it.

That's not the naturalist[ic] fallacy, but an appeal to nature. But you're right.

Sorry to be that guy, but why not just Google this?

There are some fun examples of this sort of stuff on http://dadabots.com/ , which includes attempts to synthesize music in the style of The Beatles, Meshuggah and The Dillinger Escape Plan.

The burden of proof lies with the one making the claim, though.

The one doesn't preclude the other, though. It's also highly contextual, i.e. behaviors we've evolved (for some reason or another) aren't necessarily useful in another context. Humans are irrational and stupid.

I'm not sure I follow.

From my understanding of the term, the "real" reality would be the same as the objective realm per definition;

What do you mean when you say "objective" as in "... the subjective or the objective realms"? Some sort of shared definition? If so, wouldn't this also be subjective to a certain degree?

I might just be post-hoc rationalizing my own interpretations here, but doesn't our subjective experiences of reality being based on our sensory organs' interpretation of stimuli from what is presumably the objective reality make fewer assumptions than a concept involving interconnected or "symbiotic" realities?

Why should we assume that they are not?

My point is, to follow your example re: orange juice consumption, that the reasons not to treat it as having any reasonable probability is secondary to the fact that there is no supporting evidence (burden of proof, etc.)

As I replied in another subthread, I'd agree that probabilities with regard to what is reasonable to assume (the operative word here) shift as a consequence of circumstantial information, but you can't really draw any conclusions based on that.

I don't think your analogy holds up;

The hypotheticals aren't comparable, nor is the prior available information - and even though the Intel AMT/ME situation is egregious, explaining it simply as "a backdoor" is an oversimplification.

I'd agree that probabilities with regard to what is reasonable to assume (the operative word here) shift as a consequence of circumstantial information, but you can't really draw any conclusions based on that - hence the burden of proof, i.e. the presumption of innocence in your analogy.

So what is the inductive reasoning behind the alleged conspiracy in question, then?

That it must have happened since the NSA has the intent and capabilities? Does this mean that any digital conspiracy you can dream up involving the NSA is probable?

Why do you believe this to be the case?

Not really; it isn't actually proven until you have proof.

As FooHentai originally said, "There is a clear evidential basis to infer the NSA's intent and capabilities in this area" - but it tells us nothing about this particular case, which remains speculation. One could say the odds have changed, but we still don't know anything about the real state of things.

The "'conspiracy'-label" is applicable regardless, whether we're talking about fact or fiction.

    [...] Electron is the only decent cross-platform UI framework

That's just not true.

What about Qt, wxWidgets, Tcl/Tk, or even Kivy?

Your point doesn't push the burden of proof unto those that disagree (see Russel's teapot[0]), nor make it OK to skip evidence altogether.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

Nah, it's still conspiracy theories. At best conspiracy conjecture.

Unlike "... proven, factual happenings", your idea isn't backed by any evidence - at least not any that appear in your post.

Just to nitpick: Wouldn't this by definition make it non-objective?

I would think the objective reality in your explanation would be what your sensory organs are reacting to, not what you perceive.

Have you tried Typora[0]? It features inline rendering (i.e. images, formatting...)

I have barely used my standard editor (Sublime) for Markdown since I discovered it.

[0]: https://typora.io/

I'd say wrapping native widgets is an advantage in and of itself.

How is it basically the same?

As far as I understood Yue is a GUI toolkit that wraps the platforms' native widgets, whereas Electron is a Node runtime and a Chromium instance (which lets you build GUIs with web technology).

Great job!

Maybe now we'll finally see accessible and efficient GUI apps from those who insist on writing desktop applications with JS.

Aren't Electron apps such as Atom known to have a significant impact on battery life/power usage?

I didn't mean "right" in a moral sense, or even correct.

Being a hypocrite is irrelevant with regard to what the hypocrite is saying.

Yes, but a hypocrite can still be right.

I think you mean "eccentric".

I've been toying with project-management features in various contexts for years, and I'm actually working on something that would solve this problem, as it also manages application state within a context.

I have a functional prototype I'm planning to share as soon as I've polished up the UI.

Well, news that are truly false can amount to propaganda and I've regularly seen it used to polarize and/or antagonize - so I find your comments about fascism kind of ironic.

I think this whole thing boils down to people not being able to or not knowing how to discern truth from falsehood, rather what people associate with "censorship".

Doesn't Sublime Text already support this on a per-project basis, i.e. the "settings"-section in ´.sublime-project´ files?

You're not really correct: There are, for instance, poisons and venoms in nature.

Additionally, the example argument you make isn't an appeal to nature; The argument is based upon what early humans did (not nature, or whether something is "natural"), and is a resonable conjecture.

What I had an issue with in the parent comment was "Fasting is kinda natural" - which doesn't say anything about fasting in and of itself.

Whether it's natural or not is irrelevant [0] (though I get your larger point) - but explanations would have been helpful.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature